ucai_get_contract_stats

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description must disclose behavioral traits itself. It only mentions 'free preview', hinting at limited access, but does not clarify whether this is a read-only operation, what statistics are included, whether rate limits apply, or what the response format is. This is a significant gap for a tool with no annotation support.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is a single sentence that immediately conveys the core purpose without any filler. It is front-loaded and every word earns its place, making it highly concise and well-structured.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

There is no output schema, so the description should clarify what the user will receive. It does not explain what 'aggregate statistics' means, what metrics are included, or how the output is structured. The 'free preview' note is the only extra context, leaving the tool underspecified for a user selecting among many contract-related tools.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The schema provides full 100% coverage with descriptions for both 'network' (including enum) and 'contractAddress' (with pattern). The description adds no additional meaning about how these parameters affect the aggregate statistics, so it stays at the baseline for complete schema coverage.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly identifies the action ('Get') and the resource ('a contract'), and specifies that it returns 'aggregate statistics'. This is specific enough to understand the basic function, though it doesn't distinguish it from sibling contract-analysis tools like ucai_analyze_contract or get_contract_logs.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

No guidance is provided on when to use this tool versus alternatives such as ucai_analyze_contract or ucai_query_historical_data. There are no stated exclusions, prerequisites, or context for when aggregate statistics are the right choice.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.